One could compare the gamma emission of the metal as a powder with a corresponding similar mass of the same metal as a solid geometric form (say a sphere). Then using ordinary rules for absorption (not extraordinary rules), what should the activity be? I am sure this has been done, and if there was an extraordinary difference, it would have long since been researched and reported.
Bob On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:06 AM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > I wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Surely that depends on the distribution of the radioisotope within the >>> metal? >>> Since you created this hypothetical substance, it's up to you to say >>> whether or >>> not that's the case. ;) >>> >> >> No doubt. :) But for my hypothetical substance, I will choose a >> realistic substance -- an ampule of ordinary cesium (pure but not enriched >> in any way). How do we know that any of the gammas emitted by an ampule >> originate from within the bulk of the cesium rather than being limited to >> the surface? >> > > It occurs to me that earlier I had hypothesized a pure gamma emitter (such > a thing may not exist, and even if any do, there may be no metals among > them). But I think my first question about what we know about the region > where the gammas are emitted (whether we can say for sure that some of them > come from the bulk) is still relevant to the ampule of cesium. > > Eric > >
